From: shawn wilson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 13:20:26 -0500
> Ok, my gut tells me that plain text protocols might be faster than encrypted
> ones. However, I have no data to back this up and have never noticed
> 'significant' differences between rsync and rsync+ssh. Do you have this
> benchmark or are you just going by gut reaction too?
Referring to http://188.8.131.52/NetworksPage.html , Dalton is an
IBM NetVista 6578-RAU and Cantor is generic PC labeled CE'96[sic].
Desktops.OpenDoc telnet://email@example.com/ on Cantor opens to the
prompt in about 4 s, depending on what Dalton is doing.
Desktops.OpenDoc ssh://firstname.lastname@example.org/ on Cantor opens to the
prompt in about 15 s.
What are the timings in your network?
This argument is similar to the one about electronic submission to the IRS.
Someone is bound to pipe up that the Deep Blue workstation in his study
opens SSH to the Tianhe-1 in his basement in 17 ms. Therefore everyone
should always use an encrypted protocol rather than FTP or telnet. My
reply was simply a possibility for Jason to consider.
And of course, instinct & taste usually trump reason.
Best regards, ... Peter E.
Telephone 1 360 450 2132.
Shop pages http://carnot.yi.org/ accessible as long as the old drives survive.
Personal pages http://members.shaw.ca/peasthope/ .
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com